AP: Clinton Adviser Probed in Terror Memos [Sandy Berger is the focus of a criminal investigation]

Yahoo ^

[NCjim]

I just thought of something REALLY off the wall here - remember just after 9/11 when Clinton said he was disappointed that it did not happen on his watch?

Well, what if he saw this Millennium report that said Al Queda was already in the country, ready to attack, and he did NOTHING in hopes that they would attack on HIS watch and add to his "legacy"?

[theophilusscribe]

OKC too.

[Smartass]

The DemoRats are without doubt, the party of treason.
I agree, the whole bunch should be hung.

[Grampa Dave]

Charge them with treason.

Try them!

Find them guilty!

Hang them outside the DNC and the UN and leave their bodies to rot there until after the November elections as a strong warning to other rats.

[BARLF]

"When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few document that I apparently had accidentally discarded," he said.

Right, accidentally discarded. Since the documents were in the National Archives they were not important?

Sheesh....

[tobyhill]

With all the money Kerry has, why would Berger accept no pay for advising unless he was actually getting paid under the table for getting the info to Kerry?

[Senator Pardek]

And the American people will get the same results.

Squat.

[Smartass]

SANDY BERGER:

Theft of classified documents.
Obstruction of justice.
Tampering with evidence.
Interfering with an investigation.

[Sub-Driver]

Those are a few. What would be interesting is if the FBI was smart enough to get a phone tap approved. And tapped his phone the day they searched his house. I would like to know who he called that evening.....

[Grampa Dave]

Dreams of FDR, ie, 4 terms as president while faking a war on terrorism would not shock most of us re the Clintoon

[Smartass]

You can bet, like an iceberg, there is a lot we'll never see or hear.
No doubt, there are plenty of other Dems involved.

[Timeout]

The Dem Spin.

1. "It was inadvertent."
No way. It happened multiple times, he was stuffing them in his pants, and he destroyed some of them.

2. "There are copies of all of these documents, so what's the harm?"
I've followed this very closely and even Berger's lawyer HAS NOT said this...only the political spinners have said it. They have no way of knowing since we don't know what documents were removed.

3. "The commision got the memo, so in the end there was no effort to hide information."
Note they say the commision got "the memo". But, according to news reports, Berger isn't accused of removing "the memo". He removed multiple DRAFTS Clarke wrote before the final memo. Each draft would have had different wording and emphasis. The commision had no way of knowing whether one or another draft existed...except is Berger told them.

4. They are also muddying the water on whether Berger was allowed to take out notes he made while reviewing the documents. He wasn't. But the Dems are happy to give the impression there was nothing wrong with his doing this.

I'm sure there's more. Who can keep up with the Dems and their spin machine? We should start a new thread devoted specifically to shooting down the spinners.

[hoosiermama]

Just got home.....lots of posts....
If they know he stuffed them in his socks and pant legs, are the photos?

Why did they allow him to do this repeatedly? (unless they were setting him up to disclose/track who he was working for....no brainer IMO)

Is the reason he's talking now, because he has come up with a plea bargain and is willing to testify against others.....?

DO we have any of the answers?

[SandRat]

Hey! He was just preparing legal "BRIEFS."</sarcasm

[cyncooper]

So Berger was looking over intelligence from 1999.

Joe Wilson, at the suggestion of Valerie Plame, was sent to Niger in 1999...

[Timeout]

No, we don't have answers to those questions.

Here's the timeline laid out by Jim Angle on Fox News tonight:

1. Berger reviewed docs. Sometime later, archive personnel realize some docs are missing and they call Bruce Lyndsey.

2. Berger returns docs, but THEY ARE DIFFERENT DOCS than the ones the archives had noticed. They begin carefully numbering the docs he's given.

3. Berger continues to visit the archives and they discover he takes more documents. They contact the FBI.

That's how Jim described it.

[BTW, Berger isn't talking...his lawyer is. And only because the story leaked. Berger hasn't even been questioned by the FBI yet...not a good sign for him.]

[hoosiermama]

My point is why is the attorney admitting to anything, unless there has been some kind of plea agreement made....Berger was filmed/caught in the act?

Most attorney would admit nothing. "innocent until prover quilty....etc" and advise their clients to plead the 5th,

Why volunteer information, unless you already have an agreement...."I'll admit it, take a lighter sentence, in exchange for the "BIG" fish....or fishes.....or hillbillies....or???

[hardcoreinlove]

I'm a bit confused. Are the original documents still intact or did he shred them for good??

[the Real fifi]

Some are still missing. He claims he doesn't know what he did with them.

[johnwayne]

"More evidence that the Clinton Admin NEVER took US national security seriously."

I think this is the real story, unless we find out more. That is, the Clinton Administration treated United States national security and terrorist threats with ill regard as evidenced by the former Clinton national security adviser Sandy Berger's treatment of the classified documents.